| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"mike3" |
| Date: |
16 Apr 2007 09:49:22 PM |
| Object: |
Atheism and Anarchy |
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy? Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government. Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to, and if people yearn for
"freedom" from rules, then it would make sense that people would slip
to atheism or if they already have, then to anarchy (in addition to
atheism), or vice versa.
.
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 05:43:34 PM |
|
|
On 17 Apr 2007 15:16:21 -0700, mike3 <mike4ty4@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 17, 5:35 am, Toby A Inkster <usenet200...@tobyinkster.co.uk>
wrote:
mike3wrote:
If one chooses not to believe in God, then one has rejected that
authority. See, it's the authority.
One doesn't *choose* not to believe in gods.
You can do several things:
1. Leave the issue up in the air, and take no stand.
What "issue", moron?
2. Believe that gods do not exist
3. Believe that they do
4. It is merely somebody else's religious belief.
Why do you morons imagine its mention makes it any more than
"what somebody else believes"?
This is a choice. We start out with (1) at birth. To
go from there to (2) or (3) or to stay there for life,
that is the choice part.
No, liar. There is no choice.
And while you're at it, look up "false dichotomy between two straw
men".
--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCShttp://tobyinkster.co.uk/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Toby A Inkster" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 06:44:22 PM |
|
|
mike3 wrote:
You can do several things:
1. Leave the issue up in the air, and take no stand.
2. Believe that gods do not exist
3. Believe that they do
This is a choice.
It's not a choice. If you honestly don't believe in, say, invisible pink
unicorns, then you can't make a conscious decision to start believing in
them. You can *tell* people you believe in them; you can *act* as if you
believe in them; but that's not the same thing as truly believing in them.
--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
http://tobyinkster.co.uk/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 07:03:23 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 00:44:22 +0100, Toby A Inkster
<usenet200703@tobyinkster.co.uk> wrote:
mike3 wrote:
You can do several things:
1. Leave the issue up in the air, and take no stand.
2. Believe that gods do not exist
3. Believe that they do
This is a choice.
It's only an issue in the minds of believers who can't think outside
the box.
The above, however, was a false trichotomy.
It's not a choice. If you honestly don't believe in, say, invisible pink
unicorns, then you can't make a conscious decision to start believing in
them. You can *tell* people you believe in them; you can *act* as if you
believe in them; but that's not the same thing as truly believing in them.
I've never understood why so many of them tell us it is
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 07:21:35 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 12:35:54 +0100, Toby A Inkster
<usenet200703@tobyinkster.co.uk> wrote:
mike3 wrote:
If one chooses not to believe in God, then one has rejected that
authority. See, it's the authority.
One doesn't *choose* not to believe in gods.
I've never understood why they tell us we do. Even Pangur Ban did when
she first came here.
But "Mike3" is doing it to be deliberately stupid. Likewise his
pretence that God has any authority in the first place. It's merely
the deity belief of somebody else's (his) religion.
After all, is he rejecting the authority of Zeus because it's
authority?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 08:50:54 AM |
|
|
mike3 wrote:
On Apr 16, 10:11 pm, (Bobby Bryant) wrote:
In article <1176778162.647597.219...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> writes:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy? Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government. Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to, and if people yearn for
"freedom" from rules, then it would make sense that people would slip
to atheism or if they already have, then to anarchy (in addition to
atheism), or vice versa.
Are monotheists more anarchic than polytheists?
And why would anyone put gods and governments in the same category?
The idea is that some sort of authority is involved, be that
government or God.
If one chooses not to believe in God, then one has rejected that
authority. See,
it's the authority.
Only if one believes that the deity they believe in is an authority figure.
Are you saying that deists support anarchy?
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Popelish" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 10:20:48 AM |
|
|
mike3 wrote:
The idea is that some sort of authority is involved, be that
government or God.
If one chooses not to believe in God, then one has rejected that
authority. See,
it's the authority.
But that is a mistaken idea. I am not atheist because I
reject the authority of any or all existing gods. I am
atheist because I cannot pretend that hypothetical gods
actually exist hard enough to convince myself that any
actually do exist. This has nothing to do with authority or
living by rules, in general.
Atheists live by about as many rules as do people who
believe in the existence of one or more hypothetical gods.
Atheists just don't pretend that their rules for living
derive from the assumed intentions of hypothetical deities.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Luna" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
16 Apr 2007 10:02:44 PM |
|
|
In article <1176778162.647597.219990@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
mike3 <mike4ty4@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy? Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government. Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to, and if people yearn for
"freedom" from rules, then it would make sense that people would slip
to atheism or if they already have, then to anarchy (in addition to
atheism), or vice versa.
I think it depends on why one is an atheist. If it's merely a
rebellion, just not wanting to follow religious rules, then I could see
how anarchy would go along with it. But lots of atheists, if not most,
simply don't believe in god because we don't have any proof, regardless
of the rules of various religions. Those rules came from people anyway,
and some of the rules are pretty good ideas for how people can get along
better. Pretending they came from god doesn't make the rules themselves
any better or worse.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 02:32:04 AM |
|
|
On 16 Apr 2007 19:49:22 -0700, mike3 <mike4ty4@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy?
Not that I've observed.
Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government.
WTF...?
Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to, and if people yearn for
"freedom" from rules, then it would make sense that people would slip
to atheism or if they already have, then to anarchy (in addition to
atheism), or vice versa.
Atheism, as hard as this may be to comprehend for you, is normally
based on the fact that there's just no good reason to believe that any
kind of "God" has a basis in reality, rather than on a need to be free
from rules. It has no particular connection with anarchy.
--
"O Sybilli, si ergo
Fortibus es in ero
O Nobili! Themis trux
Sivat sinem? Causen Dux"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DarkAngel" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
16 Apr 2007 11:09:58 PM |
|
|
On 16 avr, 22:49, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy?
No. I'm an anarchist but I'm not a significant proportion of atheists.
Unfortunatly.
Ever heard of Tolstoy? He was a Christian. He argued that truly
following Christ's teachings inevitably led to anarchist politics. And
he applied those teachings.
---
No Gods. No Masters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "mike3" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 04:54:17 PM |
|
|
On Apr 16, 10:09 pm, DarkAngel <drkangel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 16 avr, 22:49, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy?
No. I'm an anarchist but I'm not a significant proportion of atheists.
Unfortunatly.
Unfortunately? Does this mean you wish atheists were anarchists?
.
|
|
|
| User: "DarkAngel" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 09:41:12 PM |
|
|
On 17 avr, 17:54, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 16, 10:09 pm, DarkAngel <drkangel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 16 avr, 22:49, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy?
No. I'm an anarchist but I'm not a significant proportion of atheists.
Unfortunatly.
Unfortunately? Does this mean you wish atheists were anarchists?
I wish everyone was an anarchist.
---
No Gods. No Masters.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chris H. Fleming" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 12:34:20 AM |
|
|
On Apr 16, 10:49 pm, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy?
I personally do not and have never supported anarchy.
Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government. Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to, and if people yearn for
"freedom" from rules, then it would make sense that people would slip
to atheism or if they already have, then to anarchy (in addition to
atheism), or vice versa.
Just because there is no sky daddy spying on me, that doesn't mean
that it's acceptable for me to go out and rape/murder/steal. Law can
be good. Morals can be good. Order can be good.
The mistake you are making is that you are conflating the lack of
belief in a god with distaste. I think it would be great if there were
a real judgment day. I think it would be great if there were a heaven.
I think it would be great if there were a god, a nice and reasonable
one at least. Does the fact that I believe the American Congress is
filled with criminals imply that I want a plutocracy? No, it does not.
.
|
|
|
| User: "mike3" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 03:37:35 AM |
|
|
On Apr 16, 11:34 pm, "Chris H. Fleming" <chris_h_flem...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Apr 16, 10:49 pm, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy?
I personally do not and have never supported anarchy.
Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government. Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to, and if people yearn for
"freedom" from rules, then it would make sense that people would slip
to atheism or if they already have, then to anarchy (in addition to
atheism), or vice versa.
Just because there is no sky daddy spying on me, that doesn't mean
that it's acceptable for me to go out and rape/murder/steal. Law can
be good. Morals can be good. Order can be good.
The mistake you are making is that you are conflating the lack of
belief in a god with distaste. I think it would be great if there were
a real judgment day. I think it would be great if there were a heaven.
I think it would be great if there were a god, a nice and reasonable
one at least. Does the fact that I believe the American Congress is
filled with criminals imply that I want a plutocracy? No, it does not.
I would not want a plutocracy either. So you are saying that atheism
does not necessarily imply a distaste for authority or government?
But rather that it is often taken up simply because the person does
not
see anything they would consider as proof for God's existence, and
so do not choose to believe in Him? It often has nothing to do with
rebellion against authority.
Is this analysis correct?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris H. Fleming" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 11:24:09 AM |
|
|
On Apr 17, 4:37 am, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 16, 11:34 pm, "Chris H. Fleming" <chris_h_flem...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Apr 16, 10:49 pm, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy?
I personally do not and have never supported anarchy.
Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government. Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to, and if people yearn for
"freedom" from rules, then it would make sense that people would slip
to atheism or if they already have, then to anarchy (in addition to
atheism), or vice versa.
Just because there is no sky daddy spying on me, that doesn't mean
that it's acceptable for me to go out and rape/murder/steal. Law can
be good. Morals can be good. Order can be good.
The mistake you are making is that you are conflating the lack of
belief in a god with distaste. I think it would be great if there were
a real judgment day. I think it would be great if there were a heaven.
I think it would be great if there were a god, a nice and reasonable
one at least. Does the fact that I believe the American Congress is
filled with criminals imply that I want a plutocracy? No, it does not.
I would not want a plutocracy either. So you are saying that atheism
does not necessarily imply a distaste for authority or government?
But rather that it is often taken up simply because the person does
not
see anything they would consider as proof for God's existence, and
so do not choose to believe in Him? It often has nothing to do with
rebellion against authority.
Is this analysis correct?
You got it.
Although I am sure that somewhere there is a teenager filled with
angst, angry at their daddy, decides to be an "atheist" because they
are mad at god. Just like when C.S.Lewis said he used to be an
"atheist". Those people don't even know what the word means. They
should call themselves antitheists.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Popelish" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 10:24:38 AM |
|
|
mike3 wrote:
(snip)
So you are saying that atheism
does not necessarily imply a distaste for authority or government?
But rather that it is often taken up simply because
the person does not see anything they would consider
as proof for God's existence, and
so do not choose to believe in Him? It often has nothing to do with
rebellion against authority.
Is this analysis correct?
Yes. Much better.
Better still if you replace "do not choose" with "are unable".
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 08:51:45 AM |
|
|
mike3 wrote:
On Apr 16, 11:34 pm, "Chris H. Fleming" <chris_h_flem...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Apr 16, 10:49 pm, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy?
I personally do not and have never supported anarchy.
Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government. Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to, and if people yearn for
"freedom" from rules, then it would make sense that people would slip
to atheism or if they already have, then to anarchy (in addition to
atheism), or vice versa.
Just because there is no sky daddy spying on me, that doesn't mean
that it's acceptable for me to go out and rape/murder/steal. Law can
be good. Morals can be good. Order can be good.
The mistake you are making is that you are conflating the lack of
belief in a god with distaste. I think it would be great if there were
a real judgment day. I think it would be great if there were a heaven.
I think it would be great if there were a god, a nice and reasonable
one at least. Does the fact that I believe the American Congress is
filled with criminals imply that I want a plutocracy? No, it does not.
I would not want a plutocracy either. So you are saying that atheism
does not necessarily imply a distaste for authority or government?
That's what we're saying.
But rather that it is often taken up simply because the person does
not
see anything they would consider as proof for God's existence, and
so do not choose to believe in Him?
Yes.
It often has nothing to do with
rebellion against authority.
Yep.
Is this analysis correct?
It is.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Santolina chamaecyparissus" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
16 Apr 2007 10:11:55 PM |
|
|
On Apr 16, 7:49 pm, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy? Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government. Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to,
No, anarchists do not recognize an inherent right of rulers to rule,
it does not mean that they do not adhere to rules of civil society.
and if people yearn for
"freedom" from rules, then it would make sense that people would slip
to atheism or if they already have, then to anarchy (in addition to
atheism), or vice versa.
You misunderstand both terms.
.
|
|
|
| User: "mike3" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 03:33:13 AM |
|
|
On Apr 16, 9:11 pm, Santolina chamaecyparissus <santol...@juno.com>
wrote:
On Apr 16, 7:49 pm, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy? Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government. Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to,
No, anarchists do not recognize an inherent right of rulers to rule,
it does not mean that they do not adhere to rules of civil society.
So, no government.
and if people yearn for
"freedom" from rules, then it would make sense that people would slip
to atheism or if they already have, then to anarchy (in addition to
atheism), or vice versa.
You misunderstand both terms.
Then substitute the correct understandings and tell me if the
following still holds: atheism tends to lead to anarchy or
anarchy tends to atheism.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 03:02:31 PM |
|
|
"mike3" <mike4ty4@yahoo.com> wrote in
snip
Then substitute the correct understandings and tell me if the
following still holds: atheism tends to lead to anarchy or
anarchy tends to atheism.
It NEVER held.
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 07:51:59 AM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On 17 Apr 2007 01:33:13 -0700, mike3
<mike4ty4@yahoo.com> let us all know that:
On Apr 16, 9:11 pm, Santolina chamaecyparissus <santol...@juno.com>
wrote:
On Apr 16, 7:49 pm, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy? Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government. Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to,
No, anarchists do not recognize an inherent right of rulers to rule,
it does not mean that they do not adhere to rules of civil society.
So, no government.
No. Rules of civil society != government.
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Santolina chamaecyparissus" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 11:55:10 AM |
|
|
On Apr 17, 1:33 am, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 16, 9:11 pm,Santolinachamaecyparissus <santol...@juno.com>
wrote:
On Apr 16, 7:49 pm, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy? Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government. Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to,
No, anarchists do not recognize an inherent right of rulers to rule,
it does not mean that they do not adhere to rules of civil society.
So, no government.
No, it means that one does not recognize the inherent right of rulers
to rule, but one can freely choose to adhere to the rules of civil
society and still be an anarchist. What it means to be an anarchist
is a more complicated question than what it means to be an atheist,
because humans are social animals, and there are rulers, governments,
and civil societies pretty much everywhere you go unless you live by
yourself out in the middle of nowhere, so even an anarchist evaluates
and makes accomodations with these entities. You could say, if you
like, that there are no true anarchists except for those who live as
hermits, but I don't find that to be a very useful definition.
Atheism, on the other hand, has a very simple and straightforward base
definition, since there are no gods in evidence to make an
accomodation with.
and if people yearn for
"freedom" from rules, then it would make sense that people would slip
to atheism or if they already have, then to anarchy (in addition to
atheism), or vice versa.
You misunderstand both terms.
Then substitute the correct understandings and tell me if the
following still holds: atheism tends to lead to anarchy or
anarchy tends to atheism.
Those are two different propositions, so your question doesn't quite
make sense to me. It's like asking if tallness leads to left-
handedness or vice versa.
.
|
|
|
| User: "mike3" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 04:46:22 PM |
|
|
On Apr 17, 10:55 am, Santolina chamaecyparissus <santol...@juno.com>
wrote:
On Apr 17, 1:33 am, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 16, 9:11 pm,Santolinachamaecyparissus <santol...@juno.com>
wrote:
On Apr 16, 7:49 pm, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy? Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government. Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to,
No, anarchists do not recognize an inherent right of rulers to rule,
it does not mean that they do not adhere to rules of civil society.
So, no government.
No, it means that one does not recognize the inherent right of rulers
to rule, but one can freely choose to adhere to the rules of civil
society and still be an anarchist. What it means to be an anarchist
is a more complicated question than what it means to be an atheist,
because humans are social animals, and there are rulers, governments,
and civil societies pretty much everywhere you go unless you live by
yourself out in the middle of nowhere, so even an anarchist evaluates
and makes accomodations with these entities. You could say, if you
like, that there are no true anarchists except for those who live as
hermits, but I don't find that to be a very useful definition.
In other words, the anarchist does not _believe that a government
has an inherent right to rule_ (and therefore, to exist, since a
government's function is to rule. If it cannot rule it is not really a
government.). Ie. they do not believe governments _should_ exist.
Is this right?
Atheism, on the other hand, has a very simple and straightforward base
definition, since there are no gods in evidence to make an
accomodation with.
Ie. the belief that no gods exist.
and if people yearn for
"freedom" from rules, then it would make sense that people would slip
to atheism or if they already have, then to anarchy (in addition to
atheism), or vice versa.
You misunderstand both terms.
Then substitute the correct understandings and tell me if the
following still holds: atheism tends to lead to anarchy or
anarchy tends to atheism.
Those are two different propositions, so your question doesn't quite
make sense to me. It's like asking if tallness leads to left-
handedness or vice versa.
So basically you are saying that atheism and anarchy are pretty
much mutually exclusive and believing in one does not create a
tendency to believe in the other.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 04:46:43 PM |
|
|
On 17 Apr 2007 14:46:22 -0700, mike3 <mike4ty4@yahoo.com> wrote:
Atheism, on the other hand, has a very simple and straightforward base
definition, since there are no gods in evidence to make an
accomodation with.
Ie. the belief that no gods exist.
Why don't you learn to read, brainwashed moron?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D7" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 04:58:50 PM |
|
|
Christopher A.Lee <calee@optonline.net> said:
On 17 Apr 2007 14:46:22 -0700, mike3 <mike4ty4@yahoo.com> wrote:
Atheism, on the other hand, has a very simple and straightforward base
definition, since there are no gods in evidence to make an
accomodation with.
Ie. the belief that no gods exist.
Why don't you learn to read, brainwashed moron?
Learning to read is a threat to religions.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Santolina chamaecyparissus" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 05:53:50 PM |
|
|
On Apr 17, 2:46 pm, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 17, 10:55 am, Santolina chamaecyparissus <santol...@juno.com>
wrote:
On Apr 17, 1:33 am, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 16, 9:11 pm,Santolinachamaecyparissus <santol...@juno.com>
wrote:
On Apr 16, 7:49 pm, mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi.
Do a significant propotion of atheists (compared to religious groups)
tend to support anarchy? Atheism goes one step -- no God. Anarchy goes
yet another -- no government. Each one involves a loss of rules or
formulas on which one's life must be held to,
No, anarchists do not recognize an inherent right of rulers to rule,
it does not mean that they do not adhere to rules of civil society.
So, no government.
No, it means that one does not recognize the inherent right of rulers
to rule, but one can freely choose to adhere to the rules of civil
society and still be an anarchist. What it means to be an anarchist
is a more complicated question than what it means to be an atheist,
because humans are social animals, and there are rulers, governments,
and civil societies pretty much everywhere you go unless you live by
yourself out in the middle of nowhere, so even an anarchist evaluates
and makes accomodations with these entities. You could say, if you
like, that there are no true anarchists except for those who live as
hermits, but I don't find that to be a very useful definition.
In other words, the anarchist does not _believe that a government
has an inherent right to rule_ (and therefore, to exist, since a
government's function is to rule. If it cannot rule it is not really a
government.). Ie. they do not believe governments _should_ exist.
Is this right?
Once can define "government" in terms other than rulers and the
ruled.
Atheism, on the other hand, has a very simple and straightforward base
definition, since there are no gods in evidence to make an
accomodation with.
Ie. the belief that no gods exist.
No, the lack of belief in God/gods.
and if people yearn for
"freedom" from rules, then it would make sense that people would slip
to atheism or if they already have, then to anarchy (in addition to
atheism), or vice versa.
You misunderstand both terms.
Then substitute the correct understandings and tell me if the
following still holds: atheism tends to lead to anarchy or
anarchy tends to atheism.
Those are two different propositions, so your question doesn't quite
make sense to me. It's like asking if tallness leads to left-
handedness or vice versa.
So basically you are saying that atheism and anarchy are pretty
much mutually exclusive
No.
and believing in one does not create a
tendency to believe in the other
I do not believe in atheism, it is a description of a state of mind.
To answer the question you are not properly asking, I know of no
evidence that anarchism and atheism have such a relationship, that is,
that one will "create a tendency" toward the other. Do you?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 05:58:28 PM |
|
|
On 17 Apr 2007 15:53:50 -0700, Santolina chamaecyparissus
<santolina@juno.com> wrote:
and believing in one does not create a
tendency to believe in the other
I do not believe in atheism, it is a description of a state of mind.
To answer the question you are not properly asking, I know of no
evidence that anarchism and atheism have such a relationship, that is,
that one will "create a tendency" toward the other. Do you?
It was a fallacy, the complex question. The connection was both
invalid and insulting.
Further insult was that he knows we're not theist - so it was no
different than stupidly saying we rejected Santa Claus because we
didn't like authority, therefore we should be anarchists.
He knew, but he didn't give a toss and asked it anyway.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 05:28:49 AM |
|
|
mike3 wrote:
Santolina chamaecyparissus wrote:
No, anarchists do not recognize an inherent right of rulers to rule,
it does not mean that they do not adhere to rules of civil society.
So, no government.
That's not what was said. In this context, a government is an external
body that forces people to live under certain rules. People can choose
to live under rules without requiring an external body to force them to.
They'd be anarchists, living by their own mutually agreed upon rules.
Then substitute the correct understandings and tell me if the
following still holds: atheism tends to lead to anarchy or
anarchy tends to atheism.
It has never held true, so to ask if it still does is nonsensical.
Atheism leads to nothing; it is an end, the state of not believing any
gods exist. Anarchy is living without government, not without rules, so
there's no reason anarchists can't be theists.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "mike3" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 04:52:37 PM |
|
|
On Apr 17, 4:28 am, "L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
mike3 wrote:
Santolina chamaecyparissus wrote:
No, anarchists do not recognize an inherent right of rulers to rule,
it does not mean that they do not adhere to rules of civil society.
So, no government.
That's not what was said. In this context, a government is an external
body that forces people to live under certain rules. People can choose
to live under rules without requiring an external body to force them to.
They'd be anarchists, living by their own mutually agreed upon rules.
Oh, so anarchy is not being against _rules_ it is being against
_government_, ie. rul_ers_ telling them what to do. Although
atheism->anarchy may not be so, anarchy->atheism may be
more likely, since God is a ruler, so if one does not recognize
rulers as having a right to rule, it would be easy to leapfrog
from this to the idea that God does not or should not rule,
which could lead to an altered belief in God (such as "hands
off" from the universe God concepts like deism) or outright
rejection of God's existence altogether (atheism). Especially
if the person chooses to use empiricism as the only acceptable
form of evidence, so then the lack of empirical, quantitative
proof would also bolster the atheism of the anarchist.
Does this make sense?
Then substitute the correct understandings and tell me if the
following still holds: atheism tends to lead to anarchy or
anarchy tends to atheism.
It has never held true, so to ask if it still does is nonsensical.
Atheism leads to nothing; it is an end, the state of not believing any
gods exist. Anarchy is living without government, not without rules, so
there's no reason anarchists can't be theists.
I was not asking if one _demanded_ the other, but if there is a
tendency for followers of one to follow the other as well.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
17 Apr 2007 04:55:53 PM |
|
|
On 17 Apr 2007 14:52:37 -0700, mike3 <mike4ty4@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 17, 4:28 am, "L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
mike3 wrote:
Santolina chamaecyparissus wrote:
No, anarchists do not recognize an inherent right of rulers to rule,
it does not mean that they do not adhere to rules of civil society.
So, no government.
That's not what was said. In this context, a government is an external
body that forces people to live under certain rules. People can choose
to live under rules without requiring an external body to force them to.
They'd be anarchists, living by their own mutually agreed upon rules.
Oh, so anarchy is not being against _rules_ it is being against
_government_, ie. rul_ers_ telling them what to do. Although
atheism-
anarchy may not be so, anarchy-
atheism may be
more likely, since God is a ruler, so if one does not recognize
No, brainwashed moronic liar, it is merely part of your religion.
Are you really this stupid, or just pretending?
rulers as having a right to rule, it would be easy to leapfrog
from this to the idea that God does not or should not rule,
It would have to be part of our world view for that, moron.
which could lead to an altered belief in God (such as "hands
off" from the universe God concepts like deism) or outright
rejection of God's existence altogether (atheism). Especially
if the person chooses to use empiricism as the only acceptable
form of evidence, so then the lack of empirical, quantitative
proof would also bolster the atheism of the anarchist.
Does this make sense?
No, brainwashed moron, because it is a mixture of straw men and non
sequiturs.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheism and Anarchy |
18 Apr 2007 09:45:42 AM |
|
|
mike3 wrote:
On Apr 17, 4:28 am, "L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
mike3 wrote:
Santolina chamaecyparissus wrote:
No, anarchists do not recognize an inherent right of rulers to rule,
it does not mean that they do not adhere to rules of civil society.
So, no government.
That's not what was said. In this context, a government is an external
body that forces people to live under certain rules. People can choose
to live under rules without requiring an external body to force them to.
They'd be anarchists, living by their own mutually agreed upon rules.
Oh, so anarchy is not being against _rules_ it is being against
_government_, ie. rul_ers_ telling them what to do. Although
atheism->anarchy may not be so, anarchy->atheism may be
more likely, since God is a ruler, so if one does not recognize
rulers as having a right to rule, it would be easy to leapfrog
from this to the idea that God does not or should not rule,
which could lead to an altered belief in God (such as "hands
off" from the universe God concepts like deism) or outright
rejection of God's existence altogether (atheism).
Wrong, wrong and wrong.
Atheists don't believe in god's existence at all. An anarchist may
believe that a god exists but not believe that god has a right to rule
over us. One has nothing to do with the other.
Especially
if the person chooses to use empiricism as the only acceptable
form of evidence, so then the lack of empirical, quantitative
proof would also bolster the atheism of the anarchist.
Does this make sense?
No.
Then substitute the correct understandings and tell me if the
following still holds: atheism tends to lead to anarchy or
anarchy tends to atheism.
It has never held true, so to ask if it still does is nonsensical.
Atheism leads to nothing; it is an end, the state of not believing any
gods exist. Anarchy is living without government, not without rules, so
there's no reason anarchists can't be theists.
I was not asking if one _demanded_ the other, but if there is a
tendency for followers of one to follow the other as well.
Probably not.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
